maxedout95

iTrader: (1)

Did anybody ever try this cuz my car is kinda using alot so Im tryin to see if I can save somewhere.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...tem=1852801786

Vyrus

iTrader: (4)

The change of it working are much outweighed by the chance it won't. However if you feel it's worth a try then go for it, everybody on this board will dissaude you from it (rightfully though, tests have shown this type of thing doesn't work).
-Cyrus

Frank Fontaine

or you could try

www.genuinenissanairfilter.com

maxedout95

iTrader: (1)

I just thought that someone might of tried this already.

Jesse93GXE

If stuff like this worked, every car manufacturer would put it on every car already.

maxedout95

iTrader: (1)

Yeah I know what you mean but still you have to wonder what if

sascuderi

Read this before you buy!
3. Super FuelMAX Marketers Settle FTC Charges

The marketers of the Super FuelMAX automotive fuel-line magnet, advertised as providing dramatic fuel-saving and emissions-reducing benefits, have agreed to settle FTC charges that their claims were unsubstantiated.

This case is the latest in a series of FTC law enforcement initiatives targeting unsubstantiated fuel economy and engine performance claims. The FTC previously halted allegedly deceptive advertising by the marketers of Dura Lube, Motor Up, Prolong, Valvoline, Slick 50, and STP engine treatments. Earlier this year, the agency sued Speedway Motorsports, Inc. and its Oil-Chem Research Corp. subsidiary to halt false and misleading advertising for zMax auto additives, including claims that zMax increases gas mileage by a minimum of 10 percent.

According to the FTC complaint, Esrim Ve Sheva Holding Corp., doing business as Gadget Universe, and its CEO, Alexander Elnekaveh, advertised and sold Super FuelMAX through catalog sales and on their Internet site. Advertising for the device claimed, "Here's one the big oil companies don't want you to know about," "SAVE UP TO 27% ON GAS," and "The Super FuelMAX . . . clamps onto my fuel line, and two powerful neodymium conductors use the scientific principal of magnetic resonance to give me better fuel burn. A certified EPA laboratory reports an amazing 27% in increased mileage and 42% reduction in harmful pollutants." Graphics in the ads showed unruly fuel molecules lining up in straight columns and rows after passing through the Super FuelMAX.

The FTC alleged that the ads misrepresented that Super FuelMAX causes fuel molecules to line up in straight columns and rows, improves fuel burn through magnetic resonance, reduces fuel consumption, reduces fuel consumption by 27 percent or up to 27 percent, reduces harmful emissions or pollutants, and reduces harmful emissions or pollutants by 42 percent or up to 40 percent. The FTC alleges that the respondents did not possess or rely on reasonable substantiation for the claims. The complaint also alleges that the respondents falsely represented that tests performed at a certified EPA laboratory prove that Super FuelMAX increases mileage by 27 percent and reduces harmful pollutants by 42 percent.

Finally, the FTC charged that ads for Super FuelMAX featuring a testimonial from Alexander Elnekaveh endorsing the product did not reflect Elnekaveh's actual experience with the product or the typical or ordinary experience of members of the public who use the product. Therefore, the FTC complaint said, the representations concerning the testimonial were false or misleading.

The proposed settlement bars the respondents from making unsubstantiated claims in connection with any fuel-saving or emission-reducing product for use in a motor vehicle. Specifically, the settlement bars unsubstantiated claims about the effect of such products on fuel molecules, or the products' ability to improve fuel burn; that the product reduces fuel consumption or reduces fuel consumption by a specific amount; that the product reduces emissions or pollutants or reduces them by a specific amount; and about the benefits, performance or efficacy of such products.

The evidence required to substantiate such claims must be competent and reliable scientific evidence, when appropriate. The settlement bars the respondents from misrepresenting that user testimonials or endorsements of the product reflect the actual and current opinions, findings, beliefs, or experiences of the user. It also bars representations that any user testimonial represents the typical or ordinary experience consumers can expect unless the respondents possess and rely on competent and reliable scientific substantiation. Without scientific substantiation for a typicality claim, the respondents must disclose what the generally expected results would be, or disclose that consumers should not expect similar results. The settlement also prohibits misrepresentations about the existence, contents, validity, results, conclusions, or interpretations of any test, study

NYCe MaXiMa

iTrader: (9)

get a tune up and add an intake
that would yield more added gas milage than that thing

Triple8Sol

iTrader: (29)

Yup, avoid the infomercials and scams. This goes in the category with the Tornado, ZMax, electric supercharger, etc...


...and that AbTronic thing too!

maxedout95

iTrader: (1)

I got a intake and a tune up but I just didn't really researched this product I went first to this website for any info.
Thanx for any input this is what I was looking for.